Skip to main content
Glama

Unphurl

by io.github.123Ergo

create_profile

Idempotent

Create or update a custom scoring profile. Profiles are sparse overrides: only specify the weights you want to change. Everything else keeps its default value.

If a profile with this name already exists, it is updated with the new weights (full replacement, not merge).

Weights are points, not percentages. Each weight is the number of points that signal adds to the score when it fires. They don't need to total 100. A profile with weights totalling 90 is conservative (max possible score is 90). A profile with weights totalling 130 is aggressive (multiple signals quickly push to the cap of 100). The threshold the agent sets for action matters more than the weight totals.

Use show_defaults to see all 25 signals with their default weights and descriptions before creating a profile. Use check_url or check_urls with the "profile" parameter to score results with this profile.

Maximum 20 profiles per account. Profile name "default" is reserved.

Common profiles:

  • Cold email: weight parked (30), chain_incomplete (25), ssl_invalid (15) higher. Lower brand_impersonation (10).

  • Security bot: keep brand_impersonation high (40), increase domain_age_7 (30), redirects_5 (25).

  • Lead gen: weight parked (35), http_only (20), chain_incomplete (20) for dead business detection.

  • SEO audit: weight redirects_5 (30), chain_incomplete (30), parked (25) for link quality.

See the Unphurl API documentation for all 19 use case weight examples.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesProfile name (lowercase alphanumeric and hyphens only, 1-50 chars, e.g. 'cold-email', 'security-bot')
weightsYesCustom weights for scoring signals. Only include signals you want to override. Available signals: brand_impersonation (default 40), domain_age_3 (35), domain_age_7 (25), domain_age_30 (15), domain_age_90 (5), ssl_invalid (10), http_only (5), redirects_3 (10), redirects_5 (25), chain_incomplete (15), parked (10), compound (10), brand_impersonation_floor (80), url_long (3), path_deep (3), subdomain_deep (3), subdomain_excessive (5), domain_entropy_high (5), url_contains_ip (10), encoded_hostname (5), tld_redirect_change (5), js_fragment_redirect (25), expiring_soon (10), domain_status_bad (15), no_mx_record (5).

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description goes far beyond the annotations (readOnly=false, idempotentHint=true) by explaining that existing profiles are fully replaced (not merged), weights are points not percentages, and there's a 20-profile limit with a reserved 'default' name. This rich behavioral context is directly useful for the agent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

While lengthy, every sentence earns its place: core action first, then key overrides, weight semantics, constraints, and practical examples. The structure with paragraph breaks and bullet-like lists makes it scannable. No fluff or repetitions.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has no output schema, but the description covers the full lifecycle: creation, update behavior, limits, reserved names, and how to verify results (check_url). It also points to external docs for more examples. This is complete for a create/update tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage, but the description adds crucial semantics: weights as points, not percentages; they need not total 100; the meaning of conservative vs aggressive totals; and examples of weight selections. This is a masterclass in parameter explanation beyond schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Create or update a custom scoring profile,' clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_profile, list_profiles, and show_defaults. It also clarifies the sparse override semantics, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit usage guidance: use show_defaults before creating, use check_url or check_urls with the profile parameter to score results. It also includes common profiles for different use cases (cold email, security bot, lead gen, SEO audit), which is exemplary when-to-use guidance. No other tool in the sibling list overlaps with this function.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Unphurl toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: check_url vs check_urls distinguish single vs batch, allowlist CRUD tools are separated, and profile management is distinct from account billing. Minor overlap exists between get_balance and get_stats (both report balance) and between list_profiles and show_defaults (both relate to scoring configuration), but descriptions clarify the differences.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (check_url, create_profile, list_allowlist, get_balance). A few outliers like purchase and signup are single verbs, but they are standard and do not break the overall predictability.

Tool Count4/5

18 tools is above the ideal 3-15 range but appropriate for the server's broad scope: URL analysis, custom scoring profiles, allowlist management, account billing, and reporting. Each tool serves a distinct function and none feel redundant or superfluous.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core domain thoroughly: single and batch URL checks, credit estimation, profile CRUD (create, list, delete, show defaults), allowlist CRUD, history, and account management (signup, balance, pricing, purchase). Minor gaps exist, such as no delete history or direct retrieval of a single past check by ID, but these are not critical.

Resources